My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR13016
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
3000
>
APPCOR13016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:33:21 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:37:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
12/4/1981
Doc Name
MEMO DORCHESTER 1 NEWLIN CREEK ETALS AGREEMENT REGARDING MINING OF BARRIER PILLARS
From
MLR
To
CAROL RUSSELL
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
T <br /> <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATORA I. RE $1 )IJRCES <br />D. Monl r. Pascoe. Erecm lve Duecr or <br />1V11NEU LAND I~I'.(:LA111;~'1'ION <br />423 Centennial Building. 13 t 3 Sherman Slreet <br />Denver. Colorado 80203 Tel (303) 839-3567 <br />David C. Shelton <br />Director <br />28 July 1981 <br />Mr. Charles Silengo, jr. <br />Dorchester Coal Company <br />P. 0. Box 449 <br />Florence, Colo. 81226 <br />Dear Atr. Silengo; <br />This letter will serve to document our brief discussion of this <br />- morning, Tuesday, July 28th. During that discussion you asked whether <br />I would foresee any problems with revision of your mine plan to allow <br />extraction of the barrier pillars specified along the property boundary <br />between your company's property and neighboring Newlin Creek Mine. <br />You pointed out that contact with the State Bureau of Mines and tlTe <br />OSM suggested that no problem would be encountered iE concurrence was <br />obtained from the property owner, Mr. Vento, and from the neigboring <br />mining company, Newlin Creek (Harrison lJestern, Inc.). <br />The requirement of barrier pillars is to preclude subsidence <br />from effecting lands outside a company's control. Our regulations <br />and those of the OSM do not preclude subsidence, but only preclude <br />"material damage" due to subsidence. Assumin>; that concurrence with <br />your proposal is submitted by Mr. Vento and Harrison 1•lestern, and <br />that no material damage would result From subsidence within the area <br />previously protected by the barrier pillar, the revision to delete <br />the barrier pillars along the boundary between your mine and that of <br />the Newlin Creek Mine should be acceptable. At this point neither <br />Dorchester nor Newlin Creek has an approved plan under the premanent <br />regulatory program. Both have 'indicated that no "material damage" <br />will result from subsidence, however, approval of those opinions <br />is not final. <br />S~ely yo rs> __ <br />James Pendleton, Senior Geologist <br />cc: Peter Evans <br />Ed Bischoff <br />Jim Kent <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.